UPDATE: Two Colts players suspended for gambling, waived by team (merged)

[DougDew]

7 hours ago, Superman said:

 

Waaay off topic, but I think the sports world's stance on PEDs is poorly considered and overly rigid.

I think it has to do with creating an unlevel playing field amongst players.  Some may choose to sacrifice long term health for short term advantages in performance.   If there was a team where many players chose to make that sacrifice, it becomes a competition with other teams over personal choices and risks more than it should be.

 

Yes football itself can have long term detrimental effects, physical debilitation, etc;  but crashing hard into another player or playing harder than another is less of direct consequence of personal choice than is the choice to stick yourself with a drug for several years.  The latter is a more blatant sacrifice.

 

I can see where PEDs has an element like gambling.  Players would make or not make significant choices based on personal values that could influence the outcomes of games significantly.

[Nickster]

4 hours ago, Superman said:

 

I think a lot of people have a version of that story. But I think a version of that story also happens every day in law school, business school, med school, etc., except college students don't get suspended for using PEDs to improve their scholastic performance.

 

I just think the sports PED discussion is really sanctimonious and overly rigid, especially compared to other competitive pursuits. So much so that there hasn't been any reconsideration of PEDs in the last 20 years. It's just 'no, PEDs are cheating, end of story.' I think it's a disservice, overall.

I don’t agree in total.  PEDs are illegal and when you don’t regulate them you are forcing guys to commit felonies in many cases in order to compete.  That seems pretty obvious that it’s unfair to guys that don’t want to commit felonies and as far as I know littlw to do with scholastic considerations.  I somewhat see what you are doing, but to me it’s a weak argument.  I really don’t see how that is not clearly unfair to guys who follow the law.  (Look dude I’m no prude trust me lol.  All I’m going to say is that my past times aren’t always legal lol. So it’s never a moral consideration for me.)

 

On the other hand Stallone is in his late 70s and has done roads for over 50 years and is looking and getting around pretty good for a near octogenarian There are many others that seem to be doing fine as former athletes who used.  So if your angle is coming from the dangers being seemingly overblown then I agree it seems t be overblown.

 

But as long as they are illegal, I think the league should suspend violators if they wish to.  It’s not fair to  those who try to abide by the law.  I think it’s any orgs’ prerogative to make rules they see fit within the law.

 

 

[Nickster]

3 hours ago, AKB said:

Nick, I don't agree brother.

 

But i hear you. 

Dude I feces you not.  This is one of my favorite responses I’ve ever seen in this board and is what this place should be about.

[jvan1973]

2 hours ago, Nickster said:

I don’t agree in total.  PEDs are illegal and when you don’t regulate them you are forcing guys to commit felonies in many cases in order to compete.  That seems pretty obvious that it’s unfair to guys that don’t want to commit felonies and as far as I know littlw to do with scholastic considerations.  I somewhat see what you are doing, but to me it’s a weak argument.  I really don’t see how that is not clearly unfair to guys who follow the law.  (Look dude I’m no prude trust me lol.  All I’m going to say is that my past times aren’t always legal lol. So it’s never a moral consideration for me.)

 

On the other hand Stallone is in his late 70s and has done roads for over 50 years and is looking and getting around pretty good for a near octogenarian There are many others that seem to be doing fine as former athletes who used.  So if your angle is coming from the dangers being seemingly overblown then I agree it seems t be overblown.

 

But as long as they are illegal, I think the league should suspend violators if they wish to.  It’s not fair to  those who try to abide by the law.  I think it’s any orgs’ prerogative to make rules they see fit within the law.

 

 

There are tons of things on the PED list that aren't illegal.    Many folks are prescribed things for post surgery wellness that are banned by the NFL.   Most anabolic steroids are legal if prescribed by your doctor.    

[Nickster]

7 hours ago, jvan1973 said:

There are tons of things on the PED list that aren't illegal.    Many folks are prescribed things for post surgery wellness that are banned by the NFL.   Most anabolic steroids are legal if prescribed by your doctor.    

I understand that.  
 

Are roids widely used in the league?  I thought they were doing other less detectable stuff but I really know nothing about PEDs physiologically.  I know HGH was huge maybe still is.

 

I don’t know if you followed my posts in this thread but I think there is alot of evidence that suggests that much of the hysteria over PEDs is just that, hysteria.  
 

But PEDs in football have had other negative effects.  It’s kind of like NASCAR in super speedways.  The tech got too advanced to safely race cars on the existing tracks without killing thousands of fans a year.  So they put on restrictor plates.

 

PEDs have made the game more dangerous with unnaturally large and fast athletes.  DTs running 4.5s probably don’t exist is a natural setting.  But I personally don’t think that FB is any less exciting than the 80s when athletes were smaller and slower.  (BTW, I know drugs were used in the 80s but they weren’t as advanced I guess.)

 

Anyway apparently you advocate for players having no restrictions.

 

I advocate for leagues owners having the right to set the rules for the league they own.  I also think there are some obvious legit reasons to attempt to curtail PEd use.

[Nickster]

7 hours ago, jvan1973 said:

There are tons of things on the PED list that aren't illegal.    Many folks are prescribed things for post surgery wellness that are banned by the NFL.   Most anabolic steroids are legal if prescribed by your doctor.    

And another thing man is that doctors can and should prescribe fentanyl for certain conditions.

 

Most people would probably agree that free distribution and open fentanyl laws are probably not expedient for society.

[jvan1973]

2 hours ago, Nickster said:

I understand that.  
 

Are roids widely used in the league?  I thought they were doing other less detectable stuff but I really know nothing about PEDs physiologically.  I know HGH was huge maybe still is.

 

I don’t know if you followed my posts in this thread but I think there is alot of evidence that suggests that much of the hysteria over PEDs is just that, hysteria.  
 

But PEDs in football have had other negative effects.  It’s kind of like NASCAR in super speedways.  The tech got too advanced to safely race cars on the existing tracks without killing thousands of fans a year.  So they put on restrictor plates.

 

PEDs have made the game more dangerous with unnaturally large and fast athletes.  DTs running 4.5s probably don’t exist is a natural setting.  But I personally don’t think that FB is any less exciting than the 80s when athletes were smaller and slower.  (BTW, I know drugs were used in the 80s but they weren’t as advanced I guess.)

 

Anyway apparently you advocate for players having no restrictions.

 

I advocate for leagues owners having the right to set the rules for the league they own.  I also think there are some obvious legit reasons to attempt to curtail PEd use.

I don't advocate players using things to make them bigger, faster stronger

However there are tons of treatments that can be used safely and help reduce recovery times from all sorts of injuries that are not allowed

[jvan1973]

2 hours ago, Nickster said:

And another thing man is that doctors can and should prescribe fentanyl for certain conditions.

 

Most people would probably agree that free distribution and open fentanyl laws are probably not expedient for society.

That goes for almost all opioids.   Also,  pharmaceutical fentanyl and illegal fentanyl are not the same thing

[DougDew]

3 hours ago, Nickster said:

I advocate for leagues owners having the right to set the rules for the league they own.

I think this speaks to a lot of the comments on both sides of the issue, and other similar issues in the NFL, sports, and life in general.

 

There seems to be a growing and bolder side that wants to change the rules, likely in their own favor.....but sold as some sort of reasoned justice as to not be obvious they just want a tilted playing field.  Why can't we do this?...followed by a reasoned argument.

 

So it gets elevated to some sort of morality debate, where the goal is to chip away at the morality that created the rules in the first place.

 

The NFL has rules.  They can base them on pragmatism and ignore the morality issues altogether.  But ignoring morality limits the argument that wants to change the rules by chipping away at the morality basis. 

 

Just play by the rules, man.  That's my message.  I mean, there have only been a few over the years that have been set based on some sort of clear misjudgment.  Most of the change would simply be to make it easier for one side to do what they want...rooted in nothing more or less than that.

[Superman]

13 hours ago, Nickster said:

I don’t agree in total.  PEDs are illegal and when you don’t regulate them you are forcing guys to commit felonies in many cases in order to compete.  That seems pretty obvious that it’s unfair to guys that don’t want to commit felonies and as far as I know littlw to do with scholastic considerations.  I somewhat see what you are doing, but to me it’s a weak argument.  I really don’t see how that is not clearly unfair to guys who follow the law.  (Look dude I’m no prude trust me lol.  All I’m going to say is that my past times aren’t always legal lol. So it’s never a moral consideration for me.)

 

On the other hand Stallone is in his late 70s and has done roads for over 50 years and is looking and getting around pretty good for a near octogenarian There are many others that seem to be doing fine as former athletes who used.  So if your angle is coming from the dangers being seemingly overblown then I agree it seems t be overblown.

 

But as long as they are illegal, I think the league should suspend violators if they wish to.  It’s not fair to  those who try to abide by the law.  I think it’s any orgs’ prerogative to make rules they see fit within the law.

 

I'm not really concerned with the legality of it. That much is black and white -- players can't used banned or illegal substances, it's a violation of the policy, and they're subject to whatever punishment that comes with. Don't break the rules and you won't get punished. 

 

My stance is more about the general perception of and response to PEDs, particularly in the sports world. And that perception and response seems to be the driving force behind the policies, rather than a more nuanced consideration about all performance enhancers.

[jvan1973]

28 minutes ago, DougDew said:

 Most of the change would simply be to make it easier for one side to do what they want...rooted in nothing more or less than that.

It seems to me allowing treatments to get players back on the field quicker would be good for both sides.    A lot has happened in the medical field since the steroid area.    Many things that are available to recover more quickly are banned.   Seems counter intuitive.    Your best players are getting worse recovery treatments than 70 year olds.    I think the issue should be rebooted.    Take a look at modern medicine and come to a new policy 

[Superman]

16 hours ago, AKB said:

 

You know what, I literally agree and understand everything you are saying. And I think that the main point is that people see the NFL and what it is doing. Technically, you are correct in everything you are saying.

 

But it really is my original point, that the league prioritizes its legitimacy and business structure over morality and equal punishment. I believe going back that is what I was telling @Nickster.

 

But yeah, you are right. It's just kind of gross what the league is doing, and it isn't going unnoticed. At the end of the day, it's our modern-day gladiator arena, so they have a lot of room to do whatever they please from the "king". 

 

The bolded gets at the crux of the matter. The league has to do what's right for business. The questions about morality and equal punishment are much more of a grey area, because you can put 10 thoughtful, fair people in a room to discuss morality and equal punishment and they probably won't agree across the board. That means that among the hundreds of millions of NFL fans, there won't be agreement. So it's kind of a waste of energy for the league to try to capitulate to everyone else's ideas regarding morality and equality punishment.

 

I'm personally not ever going to look to an organization like the NFL to be the arbiter of what's moral and fair. I have my own values and standards, and I don't put public figures or organizations on a pedestal, or view them as role models. So when the NFL handles an issue in a way that I don't agree with, it's pretty easy for me to say 'I disagree, but it is what it is.' 

 

That said, I do think some of the criticism misses the main point. So when I say stuff like 'the NFL punishes gambling this way because it impacts the competitive integrity of the league,' it's just an acknowledgment. I'm not saying gambling should be punished more severely than domestic violence. I'm just saying I understand it.

 

Good discussion.

[DougDew]

1 hour ago, jvan1973 said:

I can't imagine any player not wanting to recover faster from injury

If you're talking about the narrow aspect of taking PEDs after injury, I can see that. 

 

I'm sure there would have to be strict time lines on post-surgery applications of the PEDs, or else players will be feigning the seriousness and frequencies of injuries at any opportunity.  Which could be an enforcement nightmare if there aren't prescriptive or draconian rules around their use.

 

Still though, when it comes to sanctioning the use of certain drugs into a person's body, personal points of view and differing values can give the more liberal or risk taking ( or even irresponsible?) view an inherent advantage.  Its not the same as less personal methods like sticking to a rehab regiment, working out, and eating a proper diet.  

[Nickster]

2 hours ago, jvan1973 said:

I can't imagine any player not wanting to recover faster from injury

Jvan I am far from an expert on roids etc, but it has been my understanding that roids reduction of recovery time is precisely what allows players to gain unnatural muscle mass.

 

is your understanding different than that?

[Zoltan]

On 7/6/2023 at 12:32 AM, Dark Superman said:

Isaiah Rodgers Sr is one of my favorite players on the team and losing him this way kills me.

 

Yeah, he was definitely a fan favorite and I was super excited for him to get more playing time because he took all the right developmental steps and with his physical abilities could have been a a playmaker. I mean with his speed, if the ball got in his hands I don't think there are alot of players that could catch him.

 

On 7/6/2023 at 1:42 PM, Superman said:

 

I think a lot of people have a version of that story. But I think a version of that story also happens every day in law school, business school, med school, etc., except college students don't get suspended for using PEDs to improve their scholastic performance.

 

I just think the sports PED discussion is really sanctimonious and overly rigid, especially compared to other competitive pursuits. So much so that there hasn't been any reconsideration of PEDs in the last 20 years. It's just 'no, PEDs are cheating, end of story.' I think it's a disservice, overall.

 

I disagree you see in other sports like cycling where even the pros say if you don't use PEDs than you aren't even competitive, I'm okay with how strict it is sure there are times when someone gets caught with one that probably shouldn't be a big suspension but it limits the use and players trying to push that limit on the harder stuff.

[jvan1973]

8 hours ago, Nickster said:

Jvan I am far from an expert on roids etc, but it has been my understanding that roids reduction of recovery time is precisely what allows players to gain unnatural muscle mass.

 

is your understanding different than that?

There are many things on the banned list that aren't steroids